FB: College Conference of Illinois and Wisconsin

[79jaybird]

Nancy Swider Peltz is an olympic speed skating champion.  The entire Swider family are great athletes.  Many of you don't know Mike Swider used to compete in Triathlons and was one of the most fit guys around.  You can still find him riding the treadmill and lifting weights in Wheaton's gym. 

[Mugsy]

Nancy Swider Peltz is an olympic speed skating champion.  The entire Swider family are great athletes.  Many of you don't know Mike Swider used to compete in Triathlons and was one of the most fit guys around.  You can still find him riding the treadmill and lifting weights in Wheaton's gym. 

Coach Peltz's son is also an outstanding speed skater and potential Olympic hopeful down the road.

[usee]

I don't think Nancy Swider-Peltz (sr.) is an Olympic champion. I do know she was on 4 olympic speed skating teams which is a record and she held the world record for a time in the 3000m (i think). But she wasn't an olympic medalist in any of her appearances. That could change for NSP Jr. as she is already a #1 skater. Competitive family.

[Mr. Ypsi]

Wow, four different posters educated me.  Thanks.  Let it never be said that I never kicked off an off-season discussion!

My commendations to the Swider and Peltz families.

[FormerCard]

Hey G,  hope you are doing well. 

I have asked/urged/inquired EC coaches and personnel why we continue to play Benedictine who is obviously not as strong a foe as what the CCIW has to offer.  The response I get is "It's a good rivalry, close and both sides don't have to travel far to make the game."  And though I don't agree with this answer, I let it go there.

Lets be honest.   A rivalry is only a rivalry when there is competition.  I think a Non-Conf. game against a Monmouth, or Aurora would be a better move than BU.   Aurora is obviously close and playing a team like Monmouth would help to prepare for a passing attack.

[FormerCard]

Great recruiting news for NCC fans!!

http://www.suburbanchicagonews.com/heraldnews/sports/highschools/1421735,4_2_JO10_JCASIGN_S1.article

This kid is the real deal!!  I have seen him play 3 or 4 times and he is a horse.  He is perfect to come in and give Sulo a break and then be the man for 3 years after that!!  The QB from Lincoln Way East is pretty solid as well.   Shaping up as one of the best recruiting classes I have seen at NCC!!

Great recruit for the Cardinals.  I think there will be a few more as well.  The competition just keeps getting better and better...

[79jaybird]

For years, Elmhurst vs. Benedictine was a competitive game because Elmhurst was a weak team, however the last decade I would say  this game has been not as competitive.
Former Card- funny you mention Aurora, because that is one of the teams I could see Elmhurst adding.  Schools like Aurora, St. Norbert, perhaps reschedule Alma back on the slate, a Simpson or one of the stronger teams in the HCAC.  IMO, Benedictine just doesn't prepare you for the CCIW games.

[Blitz Creed]

Hey G,  hope you are doing well. 

I have asked/urged/inquired EC coaches and personnel why we continue to play Benedictine who is obviously not as strong a foe as what the CCIW has to offer.  The response I get is "It's a good rivalry, close and both sides don't have to travel far to make the game."  And though I don't agree with this answer, I let it go there.

Lets be honest.   A rivalry is only a rivalry when there is competition.  I think a Non-Conf. game against a Monmouth, or Aurora would be a better move than BU.   Aurora is obviously close and playing a team like Monmouth would help to prepare for a passing attack.

I thought BU and AU are in the same conf...

[New Tradition]

Hey G,  hope you are doing well. 

I have asked/urged/inquired EC coaches and personnel why we continue to play Benedictine who is obviously not as strong a foe as what the CCIW has to offer.  The response I get is "It's a good rivalry, close and both sides don't have to travel far to make the game."  And though I don't agree with this answer, I let it go there.

Lets be honest.   A rivalry is only a rivalry when there is competition.  I think a Non-Conf. game against a Monmouth, or Aurora would be a better move than BU.   Aurora is obviously close and playing a team like Monmouth would help to prepare for a passing attack.

I thought BU and AU are in the same conf...

Blitz Creed,

They are, but Aurora has traditionally been on the upper end of the conference (a la Concordia Wisconsin when you played) and would provide a better test, improve the strength of schedule statistic, and be a  better opponent to prepare CCIW teams for the schedule that they face once they get into the conference.  I think what FormerCard was trying to say is that if you're going to schedule and Illini-Badger team (or whatever the conference is called now) it would be more beneficial, for the aforementioned reasons, to schedule a stronger team like Aurora as opposed to BU.  Also the "rivalry" aspect can still be maintained because Aurora is still close to many of the suburban CCIW schools.  (Albeit, not as close as Benedictine and NCC.)

[formerd3db]

Hey G,  hope you are doing well. 

I have asked/urged/inquired EC coaches and personnel why we continue to play Benedictine who is obviously not as strong a foe as what the CCIW has to offer.  The response I get is "It's a good rivalry, close and both sides don't have to travel far to make the game."  And though I don't agree with this answer, I let it go there.

Lets be honest.   A rivalry is only a rivalry when there is competition.  I think a Non-Conf. game against a Monmouth, or Aurora would be a better move than BU.   Aurora is obviously close and playing a team like Monmouth would help to prepare for a passing attack.

FormerCard:

I can see your point and I think for most situations you are right.  However, I would respectfully disagree with you that there are, indeed, some situations in which a longtime, very historic rivalry remains so even though there is not much competition for many years in a row.  I know there are some in our MIAA because some of the schools have been playing since before the turn of the century (i.e. the previous century pre-1900 ) and even though a couple of the schools have been losing to the others in their rivalry quite consistently for many years.  So my point is, that in some instances, rivalries can and do exist despite "the lopsidedness". 

[FormerCard]

Hey G,  hope you are doing well. 

I have asked/urged/inquired EC coaches and personnel why we continue to play Benedictine who is obviously not as strong a foe as what the CCIW has to offer.  The response I get is "It's a good rivalry, close and both sides don't have to travel far to make the game."  And though I don't agree with this answer, I let it go there.

Lets be honest.   A rivalry is only a rivalry when there is competition.  I think a Non-Conf. game against a Monmouth, or Aurora would be a better move than BU.   Aurora is obviously close and playing a team like Monmouth would help to prepare for a passing attack.

I thought BU and AU are in the same conf...

Blitz Creed,

They are, but Aurora has traditionally been on the upper end of the conference (a la Concordia Wisconsin when you played) and would provide a better test, improve the strength of schedule statistic, and be a  better opponent to prepare CCIW teams for the schedule that they face once they get into the conference.  I think what FormerCard was trying to say is that if you're going to schedule and Illini-Badger team (or whatever the conference is called now) it would be more beneficial, for the aforementioned reasons, to schedule a stronger team like Aurora as opposed to BU.  Also the "rivalry" aspect can still be maintained because Aurora is still close to many of the suburban CCIW schools.  (Albeit, not as close as Benedictine and NCC.)

For clarification, that is what I was trying to say.    I think it is very difficult to find any game that would be closer than NCC and Benedictine in any conference/any division.

[FormerCard]

Hey G,  hope you are doing well. 

I have asked/urged/inquired EC coaches and personnel why we continue to play Benedictine who is obviously not as strong a foe as what the CCIW has to offer.  The response I get is "It's a good rivalry, close and both sides don't have to travel far to make the game."  And though I don't agree with this answer, I let it go there.

Lets be honest.   A rivalry is only a rivalry when there is competition.  I think a Non-Conf. game against a Monmouth, or Aurora would be a better move than BU.   Aurora is obviously close and playing a team like Monmouth would help to prepare for a passing attack.

FormerCard:

I can see your point and I think for most situations you are right.  However, I would respectfully disagree with you that there are, indeed, some situations in which a longtime, very historic rivalry remains so even though there is not much competition for many years in a row.  I know there are some in our MIAA because some of the schools have been playing since before the turn of the century (i.e. the previous century pre-1900 ) and even though a couple of the schools have been losing to the others in their rivalry quite consistently for many years.  So my point is, that in some instances, rivalries can and do exist despite "the lopsidedness". 

I guess there are probably situations where a historic rivalry would remain significant regardless of one team running the tables for 10 straight years, but probably not in Division 3 Non-conference football.  It doesn't have the same level of alumni support and name recognition that another level may have.   For example, it would have been difficult for me to identify many of the Benedictine players when I played (even though then it was a little more competitive with BU).  If you are Duke playing North Carolina NCAA basketball, It would still be a more significant rivalry for the next 10 years even if NC won by 20 everytime they played, thanks to ESPN, SI, etc.  because all of the players would know who was starting/starring at Duke/NC.
I dont think the Daily Herald can do enough covering to keep the BU/Elmhurst rivalry going...

[Gregory Sager]

Hey G,  hope you are doing well. 

I have asked/urged/inquired EC coaches and personnel why we continue to play Benedictine who is obviously not as strong a foe as what the CCIW has to offer.  The response I get is "It's a good rivalry, close and both sides don't have to travel far to make the game."  And though I don't agree with this answer, I let it go there.

Lets be honest.   A rivalry is only a rivalry when there is competition.  I think a Non-Conf. game against a Monmouth, or Aurora would be a better move than BU.   Aurora is obviously close and playing a team like Monmouth would help to prepare for a passing attack.

FormerCard:

I can see your point and I think for most situations you are right.  However, I would respectfully disagree with you that there are, indeed, some situations in which a longtime, very historic rivalry remains so even though there is not much competition for many years in a row.  I know there are some in our MIAA because some of the schools have been playing since before the turn of the century (i.e. the previous century pre-1900 ) and even though a couple of the schools have been losing to the others in their rivalry quite consistently for many years.  So my point is, that in some instances, rivalries can and do exist despite "the lopsidedness". 

I guess there are probably situations where a historic rivalry would remain significant regardless of one team running the tables for 10 straight years, but probably not in Division 3 Non-conference football.

I have to strongly disagree with you on this one. I can think of two non-conference D3 football rivalries right off of the top of my head that could easily survive a ten-year winning streak by one team or the other:

* the Monon Bell rivalry: Wabash (NCAC) vs. DePauw (SCAC)

* the Cortaca Cup rivalry: Cortland State (NJAC) vs. Ithaca (E8)

[formerd3db]

Hey G,  hope you are doing well. 

I have asked/urged/inquired EC coaches and personnel why we continue to play Benedictine who is obviously not as strong a foe as what the CCIW has to offer.  The response I get is "It's a good rivalry, close and both sides don't have to travel far to make the game."  And though I don't agree with this answer, I let it go there.

Lets be honest.   A rivalry is only a rivalry when there is competition.  I think a Non-Conf. game against a Monmouth, or Aurora would be a better move than BU.   Aurora is obviously close and playing a team like Monmouth would help to prepare for a passing attack.

FormerCard:

I can see your point and I think for most situations you are right.  However, I would respectfully disagree with you that there are, indeed, some situations in which a longtime, very historic rivalry remains so even though there is not much competition for many years in a row.  I know there are some in our MIAA because some of the schools have been playing since before the turn of the century (i.e. the previous century pre-1900 ) and even though a couple of the schools have been losing to the others in their rivalry quite consistently for many years.  So my point is, that in some instances, rivalries can and do exist despite "the lopsidedness". 

I guess there are probably situations where a historic rivalry would remain significant regardless of one team running the tables for 10 straight years, but probably not in Division 3 Non-conference football.

I have to strongly disagree with you on this one. I can think of two non-conference D3 football rivalries right off of the top of my head that could easily survive a ten-year winning streak by one team or the other:

* the Monon Bell rivalry: Wabash (NCAC) vs. DePauw (SCAC)

* the Cortaca Cup rivalry: Cortland State (NJAC) vs. Ithaca (E8)

I would just add that examples of those in the MIAA which would/do survive the same way are:

1) Hope/Albion
2) Hope/Alma
3) Albion/Olivet (one of the oldest in the MIAA)

[Gregory Sager]

Hey G,  hope you are doing well. 

I have asked/urged/inquired EC coaches and personnel why we continue to play Benedictine who is obviously not as strong a foe as what the CCIW has to offer.  The response I get is "It's a good rivalry, close and both sides don't have to travel far to make the game."  And though I don't agree with this answer, I let it go there.

Lets be honest.   A rivalry is only a rivalry when there is competition.  I think a Non-Conf. game against a Monmouth, or Aurora would be a better move than BU.   Aurora is obviously close and playing a team like Monmouth would help to prepare for a passing attack.

FormerCard:

I can see your point and I think for most situations you are right.  However, I would respectfully disagree with you that there are, indeed, some situations in which a longtime, very historic rivalry remains so even though there is not much competition for many years in a row.  I know there are some in our MIAA because some of the schools have been playing since before the turn of the century (i.e. the previous century pre-1900 ) and even though a couple of the schools have been losing to the others in their rivalry quite consistently for many years.  So my point is, that in some instances, rivalries can and do exist despite "the lopsidedness". 

I guess there are probably situations where a historic rivalry would remain significant regardless of one team running the tables for 10 straight years, but probably not in Division 3 Non-conference football.

I have to strongly disagree with you on this one. I can think of two non-conference D3 football rivalries right off of the top of my head that could easily survive a ten-year winning streak by one team or the other:

* the Monon Bell rivalry: Wabash (NCAC) vs. DePauw (SCAC)

* the Cortaca Cup rivalry: Cortland State (NJAC) vs. Ithaca (E8)

I would just add that examples of those in the MIAA which would/do survive the same way are:

1) Hope/Albion
2) Hope/Alma
3) Albion/Olivet (one of the oldest in the MIAA)

Sure, but I'm acknowledging FormerCard's point that non-conference rivalries do have an inherent degree of difficulty that conference rivalries don't have in terms of keeping them lively if they're lopsided over an extended period of time. That's because there's no league-standings implications on the line in a non-conference rivalry, nor are there often the sort of "spillover effects" from other sports that you get in terms of fan interest.